[Humanist] 27.746 digital knowledge; philosophy of algorithms

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Tue Jan 28 07:29:12 CET 2014


                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 27, No. 746.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org

  [1]   From:    Alexander O'Connor <Alex.OConnor at scss.tcd.ie>             (47)
        Subject: Re:  27.742 philosophy of algorithms and searching?

  [2]   From:    Nathan Kelber <nkelber at ltu.edu>                           (23)
        Subject: Re:  27.745 digital knowledge

  [3]   From:    Joris van Zundert <joris.van.zundert at huygens.knaw.nl>     (34)
        Subject: Re:  27.745 digital knowledge


--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:16:02 +0000
        From: Alexander O'Connor <Alex.OConnor at scss.tcd.ie>
        Subject: Re:  27.742 philosophy of algorithms and searching?
        In-Reply-To: <20140127084531.82D2C6122 at digitalhumanities.org>


The three communities to consider are the recommender systems, adaptive hypermedia and social media communities

Journals and Conferences (conferences are generally the best source in my personal view)

http://recsys.acm.org/
http://www.icwsm.org/2014/index.php
http://www2014.kr/

http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/deconstructing-recommender-systems
http://techblog.netflix.com/2012/04/netflix-recommendations-beyond-5-stars.html
http://www.mlsurveys.com/
http://www.exp-platform.com/Documents/2012-09%20ACMRecSysNR.pdf

http://www.umuai.org/
http://recsyswiki.com/wiki/List_of_RecSys-relevant_Conferences

Perhaps these links will help?

On 27 Jan 2014, at 08:45, Humanist Discussion Group <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk> wrote:

>                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 27, No. 742.
>            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
>                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
>                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org
> 
> 
> 
>        Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 07:49:27 -0500
>        From: Victoria Scott <victoriahfscott at gmail.com>
>        Subject: Sources on the philosophy of algorithms and searching
> 
> 
> Hello!
> 
> I am very interested in the way algorithms are being used to predict
> consumer, political, psychological behavior, and I am wondering what the
> key texts are on the subject. I would like to have a sense of the breadth
> of the discussion, both pro and con, if poss.
> 
> Also it has come to my attention that searching is really the essence of
> the Internet, in a literal and also philosophical sense, and I would also
> like know if people have some interesting suggestions for that subject.
> 
> Thank you,
> Victoria H.F. Scott
> 
> *Theodore Randall International Chair in Art and DesignAlfred UniversityThe
> Art History Guild <https://sites.google.com/site/thearthistoryguild/>*


--
Dr. Alexander O'Connor

Knowledge & Data Engineering Group
Trinity College Dublin, Ireland

Alex.OConnor at scss.tcd.ie



--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:12:14 -0500
        From: Nathan Kelber <nkelber at ltu.edu>
        Subject: Re:  27.745 digital knowledge
        In-Reply-To: <20140127085503.8CB4E6125 at digitalhumanities.org>


The term "digital humanities" has a specific rhetorical history told in
brief by Matthew Kirschenbaum in his article: "What Is Digital humanities
and What's It Doing in English Departments?" (
http://mkirschenbaum.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/kirschenbaum_ade150.pdf) I
agree that the term can be misleading for outsiders but it has also been
incredibly effective for establishing and mobilizing the field.

Digital humanists, as humanists, are concerned with far more than digital
things. For me, the word "digital" signals an investment by humanists into
discrete, mathematical, and technical ways of thinking. It is not an
attempt to embody or describe everything that computing is or can be (e.g.
analog, continuous, mechanical, quantum). Rather, it is a disciplinary
imposition which calls for humanists to account for the technical aspects
of humanities research. Its rhetorical force comes from its insistence on
the importance of numeracy alongside literacy; Digital humanities insists
that the logical processes of numbers (i.e. digits) are a legitimate form
of humanities engagement and argumentation.


-- 
Nathan Kelber
LTU Lecturer
College of Arts and Sciences
http://nkelber.com
@nkelber on Twitter



--[3]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 00:33:46 +0100
        From: Joris van Zundert <joris.van.zundert at huygens.knaw.nl>
        Subject: Re:  27.745 digital knowledge
        In-Reply-To: <20140127085503.8CB4E6125 at digitalhumanities.org>


Dear Willard,

I agree with your argument, in any case "humanities computing" captures
more of an essence of the field.

However, is "humanities computing" inclusive enough? How do we understand
'computing' in general? My association is with the mathematics, the way one
can approach objects to make their properties and behavior
computable–symbol manipulation as you say indeed.

On the other hand 'computing' can be understood also simply as "using a
computer". In that case it would also cover the work of our friends and
colleagues that are more on the medium-shift side of the business, e.g. the
ones creating digital resources such as digital editions.

But would (or should) it also cover that third group of people that are
studying the use of computers and computing in creating humanistic
artifacts and the Internet as a new realm of humanistic expression–thus
computing as the object not as the tool?

On the larger scale of things: should "humanities computing" or "digital
humanities" eventually both not just disappear? Once computing and the
digital (or quantum) medium is pervasive in our history and society, does
it not follow that a very decent chunk of plain "humanities" will be
occupied with that ubiquitous computing component as a matter of fact?
There must come a time–not now yet fairly soon–that "digital humanities" or
"humanities computing" would sound particularly pleonastic.

Best
--Joris


-- 
Drs. Joris J. van Zundert

*Researcher & Developer Digital and Computational Humanities*
Huygens Institute for the History of the Netherlands

*Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences*
www.huygens.knaw.nl/en/vanzundert/

-------

*Jack Sparrow: I thought you were supposed to keep to the code.Mr. Gibbs:
We figured they were more actual guidelines.*





More information about the Humanist mailing list